Now don't get me wrong, I think the bombings were deplorable and cowardly, as all such attacks are. I had friends down there when the bombs went off, but I can't help but look at this situation with a skeptical eye. And unlike the blind patriots and sensationalist media, I think things have to be put into perspective. It might sound cynical, but thankfully these guys were amateurs, otherwise it could've been much much worse.
The first obvious question has to be why didn't these guys run? It took at least 24 hours to release the security footage to the public (which I'll rant about later) but they decided to stick around and... shoot a security guard? Then carjack someone, but let them go? Even the most amateur "terrorist" must have the innate instinct to run the fuck away from the cops ASAP, wouldn't you think?
But then came the takedowns:
Nothing like the old adage of "shoot first, (hope to) ask questions later"
There was an excessive amount of gunfire, if you're assuming the cops wanted to take the suspects alive. That's a concerning "if". After all, Lee Harvey Oswald never got his day in court, did he?
We've all seen the infrared footage of the kid cowering in the boat, but that didn't seem to limit the amount of bullets thrown at him in the end. Enough to severely limit his ability to communicate after the fact, at any rate.
I found a couple of other things unusual about this whole thing too. Apparently the elder brother was made known to the US intelligence community by the Russians, but they subsequently deemed him to be harmless. Either they were flat out wrong (which is concerning), or they turned a blind eye (which is highly concerning). Call me a conspiracy nut, but it's difficult to keep public opinion on your side if you don't remind the masses of the enemy once in awhile.
And the other weird thing - why didn't they treat the younger brother as innocent until proven guilty? 16 hours after questioning began, they finally read the kid his Miranda rights. I know it appears to be pretty cut-and-dried in this case, but laws exist for a reason.
On a lighter note, I kinda had to laugh at the mish-mash of political opinions that came out of this whole thing. Up here in the Great White North, we've got a new leader of the Liberal party. Given that they aren't even the official opposition, I find it quite telling that the Harper supporters so quickly attacked the response of Justin Trudeau:
First of all, it's not unthinkable. 9/11 wasn't even unthinkable, all you really had to do was think and you'd realize it was somewhat inevitable. When people are marginalized and live in conditions where bombings such as this are commonplace (see above), bad sentiments tend to brew. Makes you wonder how shallow we really are in the proverbial rabbit-hole at the moment, doesn't it?
Anyway, when was the last time you heard a Conservative side with Obama?
On top of that, you can pretty much switch the rainbow over to Harper, given the later (quite rational, I do say) quote from Obama saying,
"There are still many unanswered questions. Among them, why did young men who grew up and studied here, as part of our communities and our country, resort to such violence. How did they plan and carry out these attacks, and did they receive any help?"
And last but certainly not least, lost in this whole mess has been this poor kid who "internet detectives" falsely identified as one of the bombing suspects : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22297568
This innocent kid is dead due to vigilante justice gone awry. All it takes is a bunch of keyboard jockeys and an overzealous nutcase and you've got a recipe for murder.
'Murica. Fuck yeah.
